Tran (Migration)

[2021] AATA 1328

Tran (Migration) [2021] AATA 1328 (12 March 2021)

DECISION RECORD

DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division

APPLICANT:  Mr Van Tuan Tran

CASE NUMBER:  2006972

DIBP REFERENCE(S):  BCC2017/1597593

MEMBER:M. Edgoose

DATE:12 March 2021

PLACE OF DECISION:  Melbourne

DECISION:The Tribunal does not have jurisdiction in this matter.

Statement made on 12 March 2021 at 9:48am

CATCHWORDS

MIGRATION – Partner (Temporary) (Class UK) visa – was notified of the decision in accordance with the statutory requirements – application was lodged outside of the relevant prescribed period– no jurisdiction

LEGISLATION

Migration Act 1958, ss 65, 347(2), 494C

Migration Regulations 1994, r 4.01

STATEMENT OF DECISION AND REASONS

APPLICATION FOR REVIEW

1. This is an application for review of a decision of a delegate of the Minister for Immigration on 12 March 2020 to refuse to grant a Partner (Temporary) (Class UK) visa under s.65 of the Migration Act 1958 (the Act). The review application was lodged with the Tribunal on 10 April 2020. For the following reasons, the Tribunal has found that it has no jurisdiction to review the decision.

2. Pursuant to s.347(1)(b) of the Act and r.4.10 of the Migration Regulations 1994 (the Regulations) an application for review of this decision had to be made within 21 days after the applicant was notified of the decision in accordance with the statutory requirements.

3. The material before the Tribunal indicates that the applicant was notified of the decision by letter dated 12 March 2020 and dispatched by email. The Tribunal is satisfied that the applicant was notified of the decision in accordance with the statutory requirements.

4. The Tribunal finds that the applicant is taken to have been notified of the decision on 12 March 2020: s.494C of the Act. Therefore, the prescribed period to apply for review ended on 2 April 2020.

5. As the application for review was not received by the Tribunal until 10 April 2020 it follows that the application for review was not made in accordance with the relevant legislation and the Tribunal has no jurisdiction in this matter.

   DECISION

6. The Tribunal does not have jurisdiction in this matter.

   M. Edgoose
   Member